Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 22 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by rjpalmer 34 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 12 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Wickerman 1 hour and 15 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by Simon Wood 1 hour and 29 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - by rjpalmer 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (19 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Mysterious Fred - (9 posts)
Casebook Announcements: Katherine Bradshaw Amin (1980-2018) - (3 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (1 posts)
Visual Media: "Mysteries at the Museum" features JtR Museum - (1 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Non-Canonical Victims > Torso Killings

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-29-2016, 02:42 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Wheat View Post
Finally a thread where all the b.s. about body snatches etc can be talked about without derailing The Torso Murders thread. Thank **** for that.
John

agree so much.

The shame is people talk about something they really have no idea about, and use it to try influence a serious thread.

Am clear I do not think there is a link between the Torso's and JtR, others disagree but we should based the debate on real facts.

steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-29-2016, 02:53 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,949
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Debra A View Post
There are many problems with the medical specimen scenario-

Did medical students work nights?
Elizabeth Jackson was last seen by a witness who knew her at 9pm on 3rd June 1889. The first of her remains were recovered from the Thames the following morning, 4th June.
Elizabeth's remains were wrapped in her own clothing as was the Whitehall torso remains, including the leg still clad in a woollen stocking.

Bodies could be obtained legally. All it required was that there was no family of the deceased to come forward and object and a time limit required to wait for family or friends to claim the body first. Bodies meant for the dissecting table were treated beforehand and there were no signs of treatment and none of the doctors who examined them expressed the view that they might be looking at a medical specimen.

For a medical facility to accept illegally gained corpses would be one thing but they were doubly guilty if anyone is suggesting they then went on to dispose of the discarded illegally gotten specimens by also illegally dumping them without burial, which was their responsibility.
Yes it was their responsibility, but burials cost money. Wrapping body parts up and dumping them in the thames cost nothing.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-29-2016, 06:57 PM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,768
Default

In the early ninety fifties,body dumping,on land and sea ,was widely practised under British law. Like Trevor says,to avoid cost.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-29-2016, 09:29 PM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,731
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
John

agree so much.

The shame is people talk about something they really have no idea about, and use it to try influence a serious thread.

Am clear I do not think there is a link between the Torso's and JtR, others disagree but we should based the debate on real facts.

steve
Hi Steve

I happen to agree with you I don't believe there was a link between The Torso Murders and JTR but as you say this is something that should be debated. I also believe that one of the best ways of finding suspects for The Torso Murders is to look at JTR suspects that may fit the bill.

Cheers John
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-29-2016, 11:57 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
John

agree so much.

The shame is people talk about something they really have no idea about, and use it to try influence a serious thread.

Am clear I do not think there is a link between the Torso's and JtR, others disagree but we should based the debate on real facts.

steve
Didnīt you say that there was a copycat element involved, Steve? And would you not regard that a link?

On a separate note: was the reason for your suggesting a copycat element not that you thought it too odd for the colon business, the abdominal flap business and the eyelid business not to have something at all in common? That these elements were too unique not to be related in any way at all?

Last edited by Fisherman : 05-30-2016 at 12:07 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-30-2016, 12:27 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,949
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Didnīt you say that there was a copycat element involved, Steve? And would you not regard that a link?

On a separate note: was the reason for your suggesting a copycat element not that you thought it too odd for the colon business, the abdominal flap business and the eyelid business not to have something at all in common? That these elements were too unique not to be related in any way at all?
Perhaps we should change the names from the Torso Murders to

"The Colon Killer"
"The Flap Murderer"
"The Eye Monster"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-30-2016, 12:53 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Perhaps we should change the names from the Torso Murders to

"The Colon Killer"
"The Flap Murderer"
"The Eye Monster"
You are welcome to present any example from any remove in time where any two killers had three as unusual commonalities like these.

Or you can provide any example of a mature post of yours.

My guess is that the first task will be the easier to accomplish. Theoretically speaking, that is.

You ARE aware that four of the victims had their colons removed?

You DO know that three of them had their abdominal walls taken away?

You HAVE noticed that both the 1873 torso victim and Mary Kelly had the eyelids taken away from them?

You seem - unknowing as always - to think that only torso victims suffered these damages. But the whole point is that victims in BOTH groupings did.

Do you for one second think it is either uninteresting or something to make jokes about, Trevor?

Last edited by Fisherman : 05-30-2016 at 01:06 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-30-2016, 01:46 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,949
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
You are welcome to present any example from any remove in time where any two killers had three as unusual commonalities like these.

Or you can provide any example of a mature post of yours.

My guess is that the first task will be the easier to accomplish. Theoretically speaking, that is.

You ARE aware that four of the victims had their colons removed?

You DO know that three of them had their abdominal walls taken away?

You HAVE noticed that both the 1873 torso victim and Mary Kelly had the eyelids taken away from them?

You seem - unknowing as always - to think that only torso victims suffered these damages. But the whole point is that victims in BOTH groupings did.

Do you for one second think it is either uninteresting or something to make jokes about, Trevor?
I think you need to revist the Kelly murder again. It mentions eyebrows as part of the facial mutilations not eyelids

From Dr Bonds report

"The face was gashed in all directions the nose cheeks, eyebrows and ears being partly removed"

Does it show the same identical facial mutilations in any of the other murders ? No it doesnt

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-30-2016, 02:03 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 17,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
I think you need to revist the Kelly murder again. It mentions eyebrows as part of the facial mutilations not eyelids

From Dr Bonds report

"The face was gashed in all directions the nose cheeks, eyebrows and ears being partly removed"

Does it show the same identical facial mutilations in any of the other murders ? No it doesnt

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
From Hebberts "A System of Legal Medicine":

In the particular illustrative instance, the woman was murdered in a bedroom. The body was naked when found. The eyebrows, eyelids, ears, nose, lips and chin had been cut off, and the face gashed by numerous knife-cuts.

So, Trevor, had the chin not been cut off since Bond does not mention it? Did Bond list all the details that had been cut, and Hebbert was misinforming when he commented on the parts Bond did not comment on.

Which is the more likely thing:

Hebbert was correct, and there is absolutely nothing that Bond said that prohibited Hebbert from being correct, or

Hebbert was wrong, because if Bond did not mention it specifically, it could never have happened. Hebbert is also well known to lie and/or add details that were never there, or...?

Go figure, master detective. I am not the one who needs reading up.

By the way, I never said that the facial mutilations were the exact same. Nor did I say the flaps were. Or the colon sections. Or you and me.

Last edited by Fisherman : 05-30-2016 at 02:09 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-30-2016, 02:08 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry View Post
In the early ninety fifties,body dumping,on land and sea ,was widely practised under British law. Like Trevor says,to avoid cost.
Hi Harry is that so?

A source please?

given you have said this was done under British Law, please, the name of the Act of Parliament which allowed this ?

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.